UML '09/'10 Season Thread Part II

[Patronick]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread Part II

Agreed.

At some point though, don't the players have to take the blame as well? The heralded seniors came up with a whopping two goals in this series. That's it, their last possible games of their careers, and none of them could put the puck in the net the last two games of their careers. I don't think it's as easy as replace Coach MacDonald, things MIGHT get better. To me, for all my years folllowing hockey here at Lowell, the recruits the program is bringing in are getting better and better overall. That's a huge plus.

We're all disappointed obviously ... but ... hell, I don't even know at this point.

You're right on both points. The players certainly hold a lot of the responsibility, and I agree the recruits that we're getting are better.

But, on the other hand, these players are here for four years. Coach is a constant...we've been in this situation before.

We just watched a very large, talented senior class, who had high expectations coming into the year, underachieve for most of the season and saw their careers end in a playoff loss at Maine. Seems like four years ago we might have gone through the same exact thing.

I like Coach MacDonald. I don't think it would be easy finding someone "better" to coach this team. But at some point, it HAS to be about winning games. Period.

- Three years ago the team had the huge freshman class. We went on a 20 game winless streak. But we had no expectations, they'll improve.

- Two years ago the team put some wins together. They managed to beat Maine twice (not in Alfond, but hey!) and things were looking up. They got to the playoffs, gave BU all they could handle and the sky was limit. After all, most of these guys are just sophomores.

- Last year, things were good. They had a twenty win season. Hey, they beat Maine at Alfond! But then they struggled in Dec./Jan., losing six straight games; four by one goal and two games to Providence and Union (who at the time was barely .500). That slide cost them an NCAA birth, as they would go on to lose only three more times before the playoffs. They beat UVM in the quarterfinals and the rest we're all very familiar with.

- Now we come to this season. Picked second in the coaches poll. Show me a single Lowell fan who didn't expect this team to make national noise? Instead we got more of the same; one goal losses and losses to teams who shouldn't have been in the same arena as this team. Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

I don't know how to spin this is a positive way, I really don't. This season was about winning, and only winning. And they punted.

 

[jcarter7669]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread Part II

Better luck next year.

 

[jcarter7669]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread Part II

Surprising result up at UNH, but congratulations. Good luck.

Thank you very much. You are a class act, thanks for being so.

 

[Patman]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread Part II

Echoing some of the others as I ride the subway into work... I would LOVE to have to have the school/athletic department do an internal audit of the procedures of the team. Something is happening to these teams going from point A to point B... and I'd hope it would be correctable.

Something tells me, however, that this may cut down to Blaise's core philosophic message... and that itself may be inseperable from player recruitment.

Either that or his tactics are fried. There's just so many ways to go with this... But there comes a time for an out and out methods review.

 

[UMLFan]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread Part II

I don't know how to spin this is a positive way, I really don't. This season was about winning, and only winning. And they punted.

I don't think there's any spinning that can be done. You nailed it on your first post, every goal this team had was not acheived. Every single one.

The problem is that it's not like there's just a coach out there that will come to Lowell and things will get better. There's a reason the Big Four remain the Big Four ... it has to do with coaching definitely, but mainly it's the name that sells. Until Lowell starts making a name of itself nationally, we'll never get the type of recruit that can change a game. I love what Kory Falite did at Lowell in his four years here, but one assist in three games up at Maine? He had more penalties than points. Where was your leadership to step up this weekend? That was the problem all season ... whenever we expected to see the seniors to step up, they rarely seemed to.

 

[Jon]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread Part II

You guys have absolutely nothing to complain about--not after UMLGoon and others spent the entire summer in our thread belittling our accomplishments and attempting to explain why it should have been UML and not UVM in the Frozen Four. What goes around comes around.....

I agree, many great UML fans, but then there are the others who filled up our thread all season long with their drivel.

Dude, you and UML goon spent half you life on our thread, so what's your point? For all the *****ing you gave us all year we are still alive (though barely) and if we win we are in again. So congrats on your 1-0-2 record against UVM this year, wear it in good health.

kdaddy, dont waste your breath. They'll never really understand that a.) UVM is a team that has won MANY more clutch games than UML has, and b.) that their team sucks. They're chokeartists.

Soooo, both fan bases are guilty of this behavior? This is the internet where people talk out of their ***es constantly.

Tell you what, if you want a real pointless conversation, stop bashing UML fans. We'll loan you Hokydad.

 

[leswp1]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread Part II

You guys have absolutely nothing to complain about--not after UMLGoon and others spent the entire summer in our thread belittling our accomplishments and attempting to explain why it should have been UML and not UVM in the Frozen Four. What goes around comes around.....

I can complain all I want. I am not one of those idiots that flame things. I can't control what they and neither can you but you acting like an ***** just because they do is a stupid excuse.

I agree, many great UML fans, but then there are the others who filled up our thread all season long with their drivel.

See below. That is graceful. If you don't like the tools, put them on ignore. You'd be amazed at the result.

Vermont fan here not wanting to pile on, as I know how much it sucks to see a team with great promise and a huge upside fold their hand and not even play.

Normally, I do not enjoy other team's disappointment, and find myself feeling bad for wanting to see Maine win, as there obviously are more UML fans that are thoughtful and graceful than those that spent all summer/season trashing Vermont.

Good luck next year.

Good Luck to you guys too.

 

[WisemanFromUmass-Lowell]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread Part II

How can they not make a change at this point, even if it's just for the sake of change.

My fear is that since nothing was done when Blaise, after already establishing a pattern of non-expectation-meeting teams, had his alchohol-related off-season issue and MANY money-donating alums were calling for his dismissal, nothing will be done now either.

But I'm partially on the fence like many of you -- does the old adage that a "coach gets too much credit when the team wins and too much blame when the team loses" apply? I'm not so sure. In college sports, the coach is the only constant...

Change for the sake of change MAY be good but it also might depend on who else might be available. If Dana Skinner wasn't able to lure Blaise away from Niagara, Tim Whitehead might still be behind the Lowell bench. If there aren't any good coaching candidates out there, maybe no-change becomes the only option.

 

[UMLFan]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread Part II

My fear is that since nothing was done when Blaise, after already establishing a pattern of non-expectation-meeting teams, had his alchohol-related off-season issue and MANY money-donating alums were calling for his dismissal, nothing will be done now either.

I have donated money to the school and the program. I didn't call for his dismissal FWIW. He made ONE mistake, and it was definitely a biggie. But that's the only one he's made in his career here and that also says a lot. To each his own I guess. There's a ton more positives that have taken place off-ice from this program since Coach MacDonald took over than the one negative.

Change for the sake of change MAY be good but it also might depend on who else might be available. If Dana Skinner wasn't able to lure Blaise away from Niagara, Tim Whitehead might still be behind the Lowell bench. If there aren't any good coaching candidates out there, maybe no-change becomes the only option.

And that's the problem. UMass changed to Cahoon, and other than one good year, they're still the same program. Merrimack has changed how many times? PC changing to Army has taken a huge step back. NU has changed, and without the goalie last year, they don't do what they've accomplished.

I think the part that kills me the most is that Hutton leaves here after a spectacular career here and he did EVERYTHING that could have been asked of him. And it just seemed like he got no help this weekend. He gave up a whopping 6 goals in a 3 game series and lost.

 

[UMLGoon]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread Part II

oh hey gang, hutton officially took over the career save percentage record from hamilton last night (.9127 to .9125) and is officially the best statistical goalie in lowell history both in terms of GAA (2.33) and now save percentage (.9127). he also finished his career 32-41-10, and lost or tied 24 games in which he gave up two goals or fewer, including seven in 2009-10.

 

[Patman]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread Part II

And that's the problem. UMass changed to Cahoon, and other than one good year, they're still the same program. Merrimack has changed how many times? PC changing to Army has taken a huge step back. NU has changed, and without the goalie last year, they don't do what they've accomplished.

I think the part that kills me the most is that Hutton leaves here after a spectacular career here and he did EVERYTHING that could have been asked of him. And it just seemed like he got no help this weekend. He gave up a whopping 6 goals in a 3 game series and lost.

What's the status of Blaise's contract? Unfortunately, it does look like its time to start considering where this may go. I don't think it'd be easy to replace a recruiter like Blaise but something has to be done. Either procedures have to change or the man making the procedures have to change.

Everything else in this program from top to bottom is great other than what ends up on the ice. I don't think I've ever seen anything else like it to be honest. The students are performing well in the classroom. The arena and related items are stable and are an improvement plan. The students are involved, everything is on a path that we'd want to see... but that last element is sorely lacking.

 

[leswp1]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread Part II

First I have heard of the MANY alums calling for Blaises dismissal too. I haven't. Having been here since the Riley years and seen up close and personal all of those coaches I am not ready to call for the guys head. Some of it may be coaching but some of it has to be on the players. I couldn't claim to be an expert on which it is more and I am not sure that another coach would have gotten a different result. Not making excuses because I don't think that I can make any for the disappointment that I feel about the outcome.

Who exactly could come in and get a different result? We are establishing ourselves after a very scary brush with extinction that put us on the recruiting ropes. I know it was a few yrs ago but I can't imagine that there wasn't some fallout that lasted for at least a yr after we decided not to kill the program. The kind of coach that we 'need' to replace what we have (who I am all good with) would mean big bucks that we don't have.

 

[snwbrdr]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread Part II

FWIW from a distance - I think those calling for the coaches head are overreacting to the huge dissapointment created by unreasonably high expectations coming into this season.

A bunch of UML players had career years last year and the team played very well and arguably over it's head down the stretch last year. That, combined with losing only a couple of low or medium impact players to graduation last year was somehow translated into "they are the team to beat" this year. Once that pressure was applied it did what pressure often does.... it messed with their heads or somehow otherwise detracted from the power of being the underdog and fighting for respect - something they clearly had going for them last year. Instead this year they suddenly became the "underachievers" in about November when the easy portion of the schedule was concluded. They then continued to play to that new expectation of inconstistency and underachievement for the balance of the season.

I think your coach has done a good job for the program and I doubt you are going to find anyone better. A change at this point with such a large incoming class due would likely be destructive.

Much like UVM - your long term gradual rise is driven from the top administrator in the organization (president) and you have to give the program time to solidify the base of improvement.

On another note - there are many classy UML fans on this board - and I thank them for their occassional insightful comments in the UVM threads. Good luck in the future.

To the couple of not so respectful and intellectually honest posters - you know who you are - IMO you played a real part in building up the pressure on your team in the pre-season - placed the entire D and some specific players on pedastals and established expectations that they were not able to meet. I think to some degree you helped set them up for failure.

You still have some very good players and they will likely exceed their much lower expectations next year given the lack of pressure - as long as you find a goaltender. Hutton and Hamilton were very consistent.

 

[UMLFan]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread Part II

A bunch of UML players had career years last year and the team played very well and arguably over it's head down the stretch last year. That, combined with losing only a couple of low or medium impact players to graduation last year was somehow translated into "they are the team to beat" this year. Once that pressure was applied it did what pressure often does.... it messed with their heads or somehow otherwise detracted from the power of being the underdog and fighting for respect - something they clearly had going for them last year. Instead this year they suddenly became the "underachievers" in about November when the easy portion of the schedule was concluded. They then continued to play to that new expectation of inconstistency and underachievement for the balance of the season.

I think there's a lot to this. Going back to the pre-season many of us wondered how this team would react to being the hunted. We saw our answer this year sadly.

Anyway, something to ponder ... here are the the returning players from last year.

[B]Name            '08/09 PPG            09/10 PPG            Variance           %[/B]
Auger              0.2143                0.6389           0.4246          198.1%
Falite             0.7097                0.8718           0.1621           22.8%
Campbell           0.7895                0.8718           0.0823           10.4%
Worthington        0.4737                0.5128           0.0391            8.3%
Schaus             0.5789                0.6216           0.0427            7.4%
Holmstrom          0.5526                0.5897           0.0371            6.7%
Scheu              0.5000                0.5200           0.0200            4.0%
Vallorani          0.7105                0.6923          -0.0182           -2.6%
Dehner             0.6842                0.6176          -0.0666           -9.7%
Blair              0.3243                0.2895          -0.0348          -10.7%
Goers              0.2368                0.1786          -0.0582          -24.6%
Cey                0.3333                0.2414          -0.0919          -27.6%
Budd               0.3333                0.2286          -0.1047          -31.4%
Maniff             0.3889                0.2381          -0.1508          -38.8%
Ferreira           0.2414                0.1304          -0.1111          -46.0%
Edwards            0.7632                0.3947          -0.3685          -48.3%

No, I fully understand you can't tell everything just by looking at stats, but they can tell you something if you want to look as well. Read into this as you will.

 

[boblav1]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread Part II

The only good thing about this weekend was the weather in Bangor. Three days in Maine is long enough, I’m glad to be home. Thanks to the seniors for four great years and the rest of the team for all their hard work. I’m sure the team is very disappointed with how the season ended.

I’m not sure what happened this season but the team never seemed to put it together. Even when the Hawks were 8-2-1 they were not playing great hockey. The lack of goal scoring has been a constant problem for the past few seasons. They just couldn’t find a way to score that big goal or win that big game. I guess Blaise was right; their margin for error was very small.

One question that came up on the long drive home was the system that Blaise has them playing. The team seems to spend more time chipping the puck in deep and chasing it into the corners. Lowell spends much of the game in the corners. When it works it’s very effective but for the most part they never seem to get the puck to the front of the net for a good scoring chance. Does this system limit the offensive abilities of the players? Would an offensive minded recruit want to play in this type of system? Granted, missing wide open nets and the inablilty to bury the puck has nothing to do with the system being played, and we have seen plenty of that this season.

 

[bottomdweller]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread Part II

Blaise is bringing in solid recruits. The team has won 39 games in the past two seasons. While Lowell didn't achieve any of the goals they wanted to this year, the past two years have been two of the best, back-to-back seasons in the program's D1 history. What is replacing Blaise going to do? Is it going to make people not miss open nets, take stupid penalties, or have a puck not hit a defenseman's stick and deflect it 5 hole with under 5 minutes to go? Probably not.

Hopefully they can find a serviceable goalie for next year and some of these kids can score, otherwise, next year is going to be worse than the 20 losses some of us think we'll see.

 

[UMLFan]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread Part II

Hopefully they can find a serviceable goalie for next year and some of these kids can score, otherwise, next year is going to be worse than the 20 losses some of us think we'll see.

We probably should start an off-season thread, but anyway...

I think having three guys coming in here, all with the chance to win the starting spot will help as they'll definitely be competing for the chance to win it.

I think of the freshmen coming in, Julian Melchiori's easily the most touted. But he's on the blue line. Of the forwards, I don't think there's a real sniper in the group, but some talented guys nonetheless, led by Joe Pendanza (Jr. Bruins), Tyler Brickler (Westside), Shayne Thompson (Brockville) and Derek Arnold (Waterloo). Arnold's probably the closest of the group to a sniper IMO. I think Nick Curry (Springfield) and Josh Holmstrom (Sioux Falls) can add some depth.

I know I'm definitely looking forward to seeing what Wilson and Wallin can do in 2011, as long as they stay with their commitments.

 

[boblav1]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread Part II

I think of the freshmen coming in, Julian Melchiori's easily the most touted. But he's on the blue line. Of the forwards, I don't think there's a real sniper in the group, but some talented guys nonetheless, led by Joe Pendanza (Jr. Bruins), Tyler Brickler (Westside), Shayne Thompson (Brockville) and Derek Arnold (Waterloo). Arnold's probably the closest of the group to a sniper IMO. I think Nick Curry (Springfield) and Josh Holmstrom (Sioux Falls) can add some depth.

I know I'm definitely looking forward to seeing what Wilson and Wallin can do in 2011, as long as they stay with their commitments.

I hope some of the forwards have some speed.

 

[Gainzo]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread Part II

Like everyone else I'm bitterly disappointed with the way the season ended yesterday. Such a great senior class and I wouldn't wish that bus ride home from Orono on my worst enemy.

Blaise is going to stay and I'm OK with that. I can't see how a coaching change is going to do anything for this program.

boblav1 mentioned the system Blaise employs. I agree that the dump and chase stuff has to change. With Falite, Worthington and Vallorani, Lowell wasn't exactly lacking in the guys who could skate and create opportunities.

Nyquist and Flynn didn't dump and chase this weekend. They skated into the zone and made things happen.

I know next season is going to be rough but I'll be at Tsongas.

 

[boblav1]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread Part II

Post game interview with Blaise:
http://hockeyeastonline.com/umlhockey/Post Game Audio/umlaudio031410.mp3